IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-S) 


fe 


A 


// 


A^ 


£». 


feL-> 


'^^v^ 


1.0 


I.I 


125 


Hi 


u 


2.5 

2:1 
2.0 


U    IIIIII.6 


^ 


<? 


/i 


^;; 


'<r  %. 


C/f 


/^ 


Photographic 

Sciences 
Corporation 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  NY.  14580 

(716)  872-4503 


,v 


:\ 


\ 


X^ 


'Oi' 


'%^ 


S'  4i^ 


^ 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couieur 


□    Covers  damaged/ 
Couverture  endommagia 

□    Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaurie  et/ou  pelliculAe 

□    Ccj-jr  title  missing/ 
Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 

□    Co'    .red  maps/ 
L.ji.  eSi  gAographiques  en  couieur 


□    Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couieur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

□    Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couieur 

□    Bound  with  other  material/ 
Rail*  avec  d'autres  documents 


n 


n 


n 


Tight  binding  muy  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

Lareliure  serree  peut  causer  de  Sombre  ou  de  la 
distorsion  le  long  de  la  marge  intdrieure 

TIank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajout«es 
lors  dune  restauration  apparaissant  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  6tait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  iti  filir^es. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  supplimentaires; 


L'Institut  a  microfilm*  la  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  tui  a  iti  possible  de  se  procurer   Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-^tre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bihiiographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  una 
modification  dans  la  methods  normaie  de  filmage 
sont  indiquAs  ci-dassous. 


|~n   Coloured  pages/ 


Pages  de  couieur 

Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommag^es 

Pages  restored  and/oi 

Pages  restaurdes  et/ou  pelliculdes 


r~l    Pages  damaged/ 

I      I    Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 


Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
Pages  dicolor^es,  tacheties  ou  piquees 


□    Pages  detached/ 
Pages  ditachees 


y 


Showthrough/ 
Transparence 


□    Quality  of  print  varies/ 
Quality  inigale  de  I'impression 

□    Includes  supplementary  material/ 
Comorend  du  matdtrimi  <iiinntaman 


Comprend  du  mat6riel  supplementaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 


fa 

ri 
n 
n 


n 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  ref limed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partieflement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  cnt  4t6  filmdes  d  nouveau  de  facon  a 
obtenir  la  meiileure  image  possible. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 
Ce  document  est  film*  au  taux  de  reduction  indiqu*  ci-dessous. 
10X  14X  18X  22X 


12X 


i 


16X 


20X 


26X 


30X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


Th«  copy  filmed  hare  has  baan  raproducad  thanks 
to  tha  genarosity  of: 

McLennan  Library 
McGill  University 
IMontreal 

Tha  images  appearing  here  are  the  beat  quality 
posaibia  considering  the  condition  anf'  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


OHginal  copiaa  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  pi>ge  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  iliuatratad  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  -i^^-  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 

I\^ap8,  piatea,  charts,  etc..  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratioa.  Thoae  too  large  to  be 
<^ntirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  marvy  frames  aa 
required.  The  following  didgrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


L'exemplaire  film*  fut  reproduit  grice  h  la 
g^niroBltit  da: 

McLennan  Library 
McGill  University 
Montroal 

Lea  images  suivantea  ont  iti  raproduites  avac  la 
plus  grand  soin,  compta  tenu  de  la  condition  at 
de  la  nattet*  de  i'exemplaira  film*,  et  en 
conformity  avac  lea  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 

Lea  exempiairea  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprimte  sont  filmte  en  commen9ant 
par  la  premier  plat  at  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
derniAre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impreasion  ou  d'illustration,  soit  par  la  second 
plat,  salon  la  caa.  Toua  lea  autres  exempiairea      . 
originaux  sont  filmte  an  commandant  par  la 
premiAre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impreaaion  ou  d'illustration  at  an  terminant  par 
la  derniire  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaftra  sur  la 
darnlAre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  lu 
cas:  le  symbols  -♦-  signifie  "A  SUIVRE",  le 
symbols  V  signifie  "FIN". 

Les  cartes,  planchea,  tableeux,  etc.,  pi»uvent  Atre 
filmAf  A  dee  taux  de  reduction  diff«rents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clichA,  11  est  filmA  i  partir 
de  I'angle  supArieur  gauche,  de  gauche  A  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  baa,  en  prenant  la  nombre 
d'images  nAceasaira.  Les  diagrammea  suivants 
illustrent  la  mAthode. 


1 

2 

3 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

^ 


#* 


i 


m 


DECISIVE    CONFIRMATION 


Of  th« 


#■ 


AWFUL    DISCLOSURES 


of* 


MARIA    MONK» 


ncvtm  HiER  tssi&aiioB  m  th* 


t-*-- 


HOTEL    I>lEU    NUNNERY, 


ASp  TXB  sikzaTEMOB  OF  TBB 

...  ;^' 


t  ',  ■       -  r 


BY   SAMUKL    B.    SMITH, 
Late  a  Popbh  Prie«t. 


# 


NEW  YORK: 

PUBLMMD  AT  TM  omCE  OP  THE  "  DOWNFALL  OP  BABTMWf."  '31  NMdAU  WHBET. 

1836, 


/I 


i^**    !►•. 


•^   * 


M 


*■ 


'l^!' 


■J 


"'V 


M 


EMTSftlDi 

AoeOTdtog  to  the  Act  of  jCongrese,  in  the  year  1836,  by 

SAMUEL  B.   SMITH,  '^ 

In  the  ClerWa  office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  Southern  District  o£ 

Wkw  YoMt 


'* 


%- 


in:'' 


"*^.^ 


KM 


.••»■■•», 


s^t^  * 


nil 
U 


DECISIVE  CONFIRMATION. 


[«»j^>~,. 


1  AM  pleased,  indeed,  at  this  interesting  crisis,  to  have  it  in 

s7terrth/"f '"'  V.''''^  --eof  the^most  i^™  fec^ 
M.H«  M  n  J  "^^^^u^i^I^i«<^r.osuKEs."  I  allude  ti  the  fact  of 
Maria  Monk's  having  been  a  Nun  in  the  Hotel  Dieu  Nunnen^ 
atMontred;  and  to  that  of  the  subterranean  passage  leadfnT 
from  that  Nunnery  to  the  Seminary  or  residencfof  cfe  S^ 

.vhn.  ^'\"°'''  '*?  ^^"'  ""'^y  '^^^'■^1  persons  "f  respectability,' 
whose  veracity  we  have  no  reason  to  doubt,  who  ha^  commu- 
mcated  to  me  various  lacts  relative  to  the  Hotel  Dieu  Nunnery 
and  to  the  Priests  of  Montreal,  which  leaves  not  a  doubt  on  my 
rnmd  but  that  the  Disclosures  of  Maria  Monk,  aUeast,  L  to 
some  of  the  most  important  of  her  statements,  ire  true. 

«ome  of  these  persons  are  professing  Christians,  members  of 
different  evangelical  churches  in  this^cJty,  and  aU  of  Them    I 
beueve    without  exception,  sustain  a  good,  moral  chamber 
One  of  them  is  a  rnember  of  the  church  to  which  I  belong  my-' 
«el^a  brother  in  whom  I  place  the  most  implicit  confidence.  ^ 

1  he  testimony  of  these  persoiis  appears  to  be,  and,  I  think 
ij  wholly  disinterested.     They  were  all  living  in  Montreal  ai 
the  time  connected  with  the  facts  to  which  they  bear  tSony 
and  have  since  removed  to  this  city.  i«suraony, 

As  most  of  the  persons,  whose  testimony  I  am  now  about  to 
lay  before  the  public,  have,  for  various  and  weighty  relons  de 
sired  nie  to  suppress  their  names,  I  lay  their  "testimony  o,Si 
precisely  as  I  received  it,  without  the  slightest  alterS   a^ 
mentahon  or  diminution.     The  testimony  of  most  of  the'^I 

^B  VimtT  «""/-d-"^>".-     If  necesLry,both  I  aiid^y 
ate  willing  to  confirm  our  testimony  upon  oath.  .    */ 

Monk  M  h^v   £"'  ^"^i""^^  -^^^  testimony  which  proves  Man^ 
^^pf  It^fl    .^V  ^""  '?  '^^  ***^^^^  ^'^"^  Nunnery  in  Mon 
{[vfniri^  /hV^^''''Tuyf  ^  '^^J^^^°  i«  now  married  and 
wT  h^M        ?/"T  "^'t^^'  hnshand.    She  states  that  she  was 
with  Maria  Monk  at  Mrs.  Workman's  school  in  Montreal  •  and 
that  she  and  Maria  Monk  entered  the  CongregatioSine^ 

vL,^'?n  *?h  T'  '^'"^  '•  '^^l  ^'^  MonkirSained  about  t^ 
years  m  the  Congregational  Nunnery ;  and  that  shortly  aC 


^w 


^■VP 


T 


V 


41  DECISIVE    CONFIRMATION. 

this  she  entered  the  Black  Nunnery.  She  states  that  she  saw 
Maria  Monk  while  she  was  a  novice  in  the  Black  Nunnery,  and 
conversed  with  her  in  the  garden  when  she  went  to  see  an  ac- 
quaintance in  the  Hospital  of  that  Nunnery. 

This  same  lady  states,  in  regard  to  herself,  that  her  brother 
called  to  see  her  at  the  Congregational  Nunnery,  where  she  was 
stili  residing  as  a  novice,  and  that  while  they  were  talking  to- 
gether in  the  pailoir,  Ixer  brother  saw  a  Priest,  the  Rev.  Mr, 

,  in  the  adjoining  room,  put  his  anus  around  the  neck  of 

a  Nun,  and  kiss  her.  "  Seeing  this,  my  brother,"  (says  she,) 
"  exclaimed,  '  O,  my  God,  what  kind  of  a  place  is  this  ! ' — or 
some  such  expressions — '  Is  it  possible  that  my  sister  is  in  such 
a  place  as  this  ! — I  will  get  you  out  of  this  place  if  I  have  to 
tear  you  out.' "  In  consequence  of  this,  the  lady  states,  that  her 
parents  withdrew  her  from  the  Nunnery.  She  states,  further- 
more, that  some  time  after  she  left  the  Congregational  Nunnery 
she  visited  the  Black  Nunnery,  to  see  an  acquaintance  in  the 
Hospital,  and  that  there  she  saw  Maria  Monk  serving  the  col- 
lation, or  lunch,  and  thai  she  was  there  a  veiled  Nun.  She 
states  that  she  was  going  to  speak  to  Maria,  but  that  she  made 
a  sign,  by  putting  her  finger  across  her  mouth,  that  it  was  time 
of  silence. 

2.  The  next  testimony  we  have  of  Maria  Monk's  having  been 
a  Nun  in  the  Hotel  Dieu  Nunnery  at  Montreal,  is  that  of  a  re- 
spectable young  gentleman,  who  states  that  he  was  personally 
acquainted  with  "Maria  Monk  and  her  family  in  Montreal,  and 
that  he  has  heard  Maria  Monk's  own  mother  say  that  she  was 
in  the  Nunnery. 

Both  the  above  witnesses  say,  moreover,  that  the  Maria  Monk 
who  is  now  in  this  city,  the  Authoress  of  the  "Awful  Dis- 
closures," is  identically  the  same  Maria  Monk  who  was  in  the 
Hotel  Dieu  Nunnery  at  Montreal. 

Having  now  proved,  by  two  respectable  and  disinterested 
witnesses,  that  Maria  Monk  was  a  Nun  in  the  Hotel  Dieu  Nun- 
nery in  Montreal,  we  will  now  proceed  to  substantiate  the  fact 
of  the  subterranean  passage  spoken  of  by  Maria  Monk,  which 
her  book  tells  us  leads  from  the  Nunnery  to  the  Seminary  of  the 
Priests. 

The  testimony  which  we  now  bring  is  that  of  a  respectable 
lady  in  this  eity,  who  is  a  pious  member  of  an  cvangeHcal 
church.  She  states  that  she  saw  a  subterranean  passage  four  or 
five  feet,  as  near  as  she  can  remember,  from  the  surface  of  tlie 
ground.  It  was  built  of  stone,  and  appeared  to  her  to  be  about 
seven  feet  wide.  She  states  that  she  saw  only  a  part  of  the 
depth  of  the  v/all  of  this  subterranean  passage,  and  that  it  ap- 
|>eared  to  extend  from  the  Hotel  Dieu  Nunnery  in  Montreal 


1 


DECISIVE   CONFIRMATION.  § 

passed  on  in  a  directotlards  the  Se  '  ufar.    ^^""f'^'  "P^ 
that  he  understood,  ftom  the  CaJiXn^Kere'SanSt; 

/^  |pZt,r„eTS  tfe  S"elr.^ '"«  ^  ^-^  "^S 

e^t"Z  tCrr  '""'^'^•'  ^^PealS^in  her  tooMoe^Sly 
passage  from  the  Seminary"„  ,"„„erv  is  us  J^?™"'"" 

because,  there,  most  ce?3  kk      5?^^'*^  ^Pl"  '°  l^^  ^^^^' 


.<iM~' 


,r^-*.a^^ 


t% 


6 


DECISIVE    CONFIRMATION'. 


power  ever  to  fill  it  up  in  such  a  way  as  to  prevent  detection,  if 
a  diligent  and  scrutinizing  search  were  to  be  made.  We  think 
that  the  public  authorities  of  Montreal  are,  in  deference  to  pub- 
lic feeling,  to  the  innportance  of  the  thing,  and  in  duty,  bound 
to  have  the  search  made,  and  to  have  it  done  without  delay. 

They  have  denied  that  Maria  Monk  was  a  Nun,  or  that  she 
ever  lived  in  the  Hotel  Dieu  Nunnery.  It  being  now  proved 
that  she  was  a  Nun,  and  that  she  did  live  in  the  Hotel  Dieu 
Nunnery,  it  follows  that  they  have  uttered  what  is  false ;  a  pre- 
sumptive evidence  that  the  Disclosures  of  Maria  Monk  are  but 

too  true. 

What  convinces  us,  furthermore,  that  these  disclosures  are 
true,  is  the  fact  that  Maria  Monk  had  never  spoken  a  word  to 
any  one  on  the  subject  until  she  was  taken  dangerously  ill  in 
the  Alms-house,  and  was  not  expected  to  live.  'The  Rev.  Mr. 
Tappan,  who  was  the  Chaplain  of  the  institution,  was  then  sent 
for  by  her,  and  when  he  entered  her  room,  she  told  him  she  had 
something  important  to  communicate  to  him,  and  that  she  could 
not  die  in  peace  without  disclosing  it.  She  then  imparted  to 
him  the  substance  of  what  she  has  disclosed  in  her  book.  This 
I  state  on  the  authority  of  the  Rev.  Mr.  Tappan  himself,  from 
Avhose  own  lips  I  heard  it. 

I  would  here  observe,  that  I  have  not  seen  one  person  who  is  _ 
particularly  acquainted  with  the  circumstances  attending  Mwiii 
Monk's  Disclosures,  that  doubts  the  truth  of  her  statenients.  '' 
Few  wish  to  be  guilty  of  a  lie  just  in  the  jaws  of  death.  Nor 
can  an  instance,  we  presume,  be  found,  not  a  solitary  instance, 
of  a  dying  person's  inventing  a  tissue  of  falsehoods,  just  upon 
the  brink  of  being  launched  into  eternity ;  of  falsehoods,  6sp6- 
cially,  from  which  nothing  was  to  be  gained ;  but,  on  the  tion- 
trary,  the  person's  own  character  defamed.  Such  a  thing  never 
has  been  known ;  therefore,  this  circumstance  alone  confirms 
the  truth  of  what  Maria  Monk  has  disclosed. 

A  certain  Mr.  G.  Vale,  of  this  city,  has  published  a  Review 
of  the  "  Awful  Disclosures,"  some  few  points  of  which  I 
will  here  touch  upon  ;  the  rest  may  pass  for  what  they  are 
Avorth.  In  page  8,  9,  and  10,  of  the  Review,  Maria  Monk  is 
made  out  to  have  "fixed  upon  herself  the  character  of  a  delib- 
erate liar  ;  and  to  have  established  her  character  as  a  thief ^ 
If  these  charges  be  true,  as  the  Review  seems  to  take  for  grant- 
ed, it  would  only  prove  what  we  are  quite  willing  to  ^rant,  and 
that  is,  that  the  influence  of  Popery  is  to  corrupt  ana  to  demo- 
ralize. Maria  Monk  was  then  a  Papist ;  and  if  she  was  then 
a  liar  and  a  thief,  that  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  credibility  of 
h^r  testimony  sincr  her  conversion  from  Popery.  She  is  now  a 
Protestant ;  and  if  the  Reviewer  can  show  that  she  has  utter- 


DECISIVE    rCNPIRMATION.  J 

for  her  Imvinff  been  n  thi^f  «,».l  *«K»fu  ner  as  a  Jiar.  As 
we  are  ,.„.  a.  ?uX°i.^si„te'JL1  ::„%Lrt  V^ 

called  Pastoks,  but  inrealitV  „J  '"'■'••'°^.  says  he,  "are 
fled  with  the  fliee  th  rM  fa  \  ?, "•7^"?''"*''  *'>«■  ""^Mi*- 
•he  appellat.^„,Tot'  of  s  epl  eMs  K  tta^''™''  '  """  ™"' 

Ecclesiastics,  pkompted  hv  .v.n.l^  5  i  ""  '^^genera'e 
barter  assassins  ion,rduliervinte,f^,^'r'  *"  «"'"'  ^^n  '» 
I«rjury.     What  iwS  bjfe  PaKL^v'  ,7""^'  ■""■ 

Monk,  relative  to  her  mn.W  ,'  'V'^'d™'!"'  "^^'  ^V  Maria 
great  logician  to  see   Zm    1,^"       "•  "^T"-    "  '■«l"'f««  ■"> 

must  come  to  are  that  M.r?,  m       "''     ^""^  inclusions  we 

womw  when  sheUs  L  Pan  st  '?^i',  /""f  ^""^''  "'•Pri>"=ip'«l 
have  been  loeical  and  wS;.„      conclusions  would  at  least 

Monk  was  wTe^'  *e  wl'Tpa^ist."  Xt^h^rs^M  "^'^ 
no  beannsr  at  all  upon  her  testimony  now  *"'  '**"■  """^ 

ob^'tio™°ti";h''e"J^:city'o''f  Mkr^lJ?  V""  ""  '"»■--'"<' 
«.ujething,hat  herco4V  e&^„t'*'J.'tuTr''■  '™™ 
"1^^ ^ir'lh"" '" '''"' ""'"''■'«=  'WsVrtterdTcin,  Lr,iri,™- 

fac^^wSi^fe^v^oV^t  itfff^i:',^^ 

such  thino-as  her  sau^nn.f^„.f  u  :  ^","/<'  P-  -«">  and  find  no 
nery  al\1^ZrZflt^'  she  entered  the  school  of  the  Nun- 
lows  •  <'  When  T  w£  ^         ^^'  '''''^  ^'^  precisely  as  fol- 

Frenrh  ^^«^  1  i         ^  "^'  ^^^®  *^  learn  to  read  and  write 

iNTthe^rn  1  -^^l"  ?.^^^^  "^^  -"^'^^  seriously  OF  atJ-d^ 
iNG  the  school  in  the  Congregational  Nunnerv  »  n  20     if  Z 

THiVo^^nT^cTuIn'  '/"'"^^  between  ^JSl^LtBoL^" 


.>^-: 


g  DECISIVE  CONFIRMATION. 

The  young  lady  does  not  pretend  to  state  her  age  pre- 
cisely. There  is  nothing  at  all  strange,  or  \incomn(on  in 
it,  if  she  did  not  know  exactly  how  old  she  was.  When 
she  speaks  of  her  ago  in  rclatio?i  to  the  facts  which  she  de- 
scribes, she  «Tenerally  uses  the  expression  about;  showing, 
thereby,  that  she  did  not  pretend  to  know  at  what  werise  pe- 
riod of  her  age  the  facts  sho  relates  occurred.  In  place  of  ten 
years  old  she  might  have  been  eleven,  or  even  i^st  eleven, 
when  she' entered  the  school :  would  this  prove  that  jJ|»  was 
relating  what  sho  knew  to  be  bo  false  ? 

I  have  seen  Maria  Monk  several  times,  and  if  she  had  not 
told  me  that  she  is  twenty  years  of  age,  1  would  not  have  be- 
lieved that  she  is  more  than  eighteen.  Mr.  Vale  states  that 
"Mr.  Tappan  informed  him  that  Maria  Monk  was  then,  when 
in  the  Alms  House,  or  when  he  was  in  the  habit  of  seeing  her, 
about  twentv-five  years  old."  The  Rev.  Mr.  Tappan,  whom  I 
have  spokeii  to  on  this  subject,  absohitoly  denies  that  he  ever 
said  any  such  thing.  The  general  impression  of  those  who 
have  seen  her,  is,  that  she  is  about  twenty  vears  old  Any  one 
that  would  judge  her  to  be  twenty-five  ye  ci  of  ago,  must,  we 
should  think,  be  defective  in  his  eye-sight. 

Since  Mr.  Vale,  in  his  candid  Review,  is  pleased  to  make  so 
much  of  a  difficulty  upon  *his  part  of  the  subject,  we  will  now 

clear  it  all  up.  ,    .     ,,     , 

«« About  ten  years ;"— we  will  say  that  Maria  Monk  was 
eleven  years  old  when  she  entered  the  school.     She  informs  us, 
that,  from  this  time  until  she  quit  thy  Convent,  that  is,  previous 
to  her  re-entering  it  again  to  become  a  Nun,  there  elapsed /oMr 
or  five  years,  p.  43.     Add  this  to  the  eleven,  and  it  will  brmg 
her  to  sixteen  years  of  age.     After  she  was  out  of  the  Nun- 
nery some  time,  how  long  is  not  s.ated,  she  went  to  St.  Dennis, 
and  after  remaining  there  three  months,  she  returned  to  Mon- 
treal, and  was  re-admitted  into  the  Nunnery,  p.  43.     This  add- 
ed to  the  former,  brings  her  age  up  to  sixteen  years  and  three 
months.     She  remained  in  the  Nunnery,  after  her  admission 
the  last  time,  as  she  states  in  the  title  page,  two  years.     This 
brings  h  .r  age  to  eighteen  years  and  three  months.     She  made 
her  final  escape  from  the  Nunnerv,  in  the  month  of  December, 
in  the  year  1834.     From  that  tirne  to  the  present  date,  March, 
1836,  is  one  year  and  two  montiis.     Now  l^t  ns  add  this  to  her 
age  as  above  calculated,  and  it  makes  Maria  Monk  to  Ixi  now 
nineteen  years  and  live  months  old.    When  she  tells  us,  there- 
fore, that  she  is  twenty  years  of  age,  we  have  no  just  reason 
whatever,  for  doubting  her  word.     After  her  escape  from  the 
Nunnery,  she  changed  her  dress,  and  during  the  few  months 
thai  she  still  remained  in  Canada,  she  passed  through  various 


1^ 


^mfw 


DECISIVE    CONFIRMATION, 


9 


Mencs  and  trials,  whicl-.,  in  tha  precipitation  of  ffettinjr  out  the 
hrst  eduion  of  hor  book,  vas  entirdv  iieir)cctcd  to  ^)e  publish- 
ea  I  his,  however,  will  all  ajjpeur  in  the  second  edition,  which 
IS  now  being  prepared  for  the  press. 

Mr.  Vale  states  that  ho  was  informed  by  Mr.  and  Mrs  Ton- 
pan,  the  '^liaplain  and  his  lady,  that  Mana  Monk  was  dehvered 
f/iJ'tr'',  f.  'f  \^"tumn,  If  last  July  was  last  AHt,^mn,  then 
It  is  true  that  she  was  dehvered  of  a  ciiild  last  Autwnn  ;  other- 
wise It  IS  untrue  that  she  was  delivered  of  a  child  laft  Au- 
tumn ;  because  her  child  was  born  in  the  month  of  Julv.  I 
have  calleci  on  Rev  Mr.  Tappan,  who  confirms  what  I  have 
said,  tnat  tho  child  of  Maria  Monk  was  born  in  Julv.  He  do- 
mes e^er  having  told  Mr.  Vale  that  the  child  was  born  in  tho 
Autumn,  or  thuc  Maria  Monk  was  twenty-five  years  old  It 
was  on  the  eighth  of  August  that  I  v. sited  the  Alms  IIouso 
myself  to  see  Maria  Monk,  at  which  time,  her  child  xvas  al- 
ready  about  three  weeks  old.  We  have  now  one  with  Mr 
Vales  Review,  in  which  tlie  facts  are  so  fairly  stated,  and  so 
candidly  exammeu  -  -Mr.  Vale  is  one  of  those  ^^entlemen  who 
deny  the  divinity  of  the  Christian  religion,  an^  who  was  con- 
spicuous by  the  pan  which  he  took  in  tho  public  discussion 
against  Dr.  Sleigh.  ^ 

The  facts  which  are  related  in  the  "Awful  Disclosures," 
are  so  diabohcal,  that  one,  at  first,  seems  instinctively  moved  to 
disbelieve  them.  But  when  we  turn  over  the  pages  of  history, 
and  read  ah  the  atrocities  whicli  are  there  recorded  of  the  Ro- 
mish Priesthood,  ani  recorded,  too,  by  their  own  historians,  we 
ponder  on  the  question,  "  why  are  they  not  now  as  capable  of 
tne  same  enorrmties  for  which  they  have  been  characterized 
during  a  long  succession  of  ages  .'"— Therj  iias,  just  at  this 
time,  been  issued  from  the  Press,  a  work  er.titled  "Rosamond 
or  a  Na-rative  of  the  Captivity  and  Sufferings  of  an  Ameri- 
can t  emale.tmder  the  Popish  Priests  in  the  Island  of  Cuba, 
with  a  full  Disclosure  of  their  Manners  and  Customs  •  writ- 
len  by  herself  ^^  in  regard  to  the  truth  of  which,  we  think,  there 
IS  not  the  shadow  of  a  doubt.  The  fact  is,  that  the  disclosures 
made  by  Rosamond,"  are  confirmed  by  testimony  that  is  de- 
monstratively  conclusive.     The  disclosures  of  Rosamond  are 

i!;"?'!?^       '^P'^'' u"^  ^°  'f  ^'"^'     ^'  t'»e^«  ''^••"  true,  then,  nothing 
that  Maria  Monk  has  related  is  at  all  incredible. 

In  reading  the  "Am-ful  Disclosures  of  Maria  Monk" 

there  is  one  fact  that  sho  relates,  which  at  first  sight,  one  mio-lu 

suppose  is  altogether  too  improbable  to  be  believed.     This^  is 

the  pit  m  the  cellar  of  the  Convent.    In  this  pit  she  states  that 

he  bodies  of  the  children  who  are  the  illegitimate  offspring  of 

the  Priests  and  the  Nuns,  are  thrown,  after  being  murdered 


10 


DECISIVE   CONFIRMATION. 


This  pit,  she  states,  is  "  so  deep  that  she  could  perceive  no 
bottom,"  and  that  "  it  is  about  twelve  or  fifteen  feet  across,  situ- 
ated in  the  middle  of  the  cellar,  and  unprotected  by  any  kind 
of  curb,  so  that  one  might  easily  have  walked  into  it  in  the  dark." 

The  incredibility  of  this  fact,  however,  all  things  considered, 
will,  we  think,  afford  a  motive  of  credibility.  If  the  authoress 
were  here  relating  a  fiction  oi  Jier  own  imagination,  it  is  by  far 
the  more  reasonable  to  suppose  that  she  would  have  described 
this  pit  in  a  very  different  manner  from  what  she  has  done. 
Who  is  there  that  \vould  not  have  described  it  as  being  sit- 
uated in  the  most  concealed  place  that  could  be  found?  and 
instead  of  representing  it  as  being  entirely  open,  and  of  the 
width  of  twelve  or  fifteen  feet,  would  not  have  statea  that  it 
was  closely  cover  «3d  over,  with  a  small  trap-door  to  open  into 
it  .'  Tiiis  is  what  every  one  would  expect  to  find  in  regard  to 
such  a  place.  This,  however,  she  has  not  stated.  There  is 
something,  therefore,  in  her  relation  relative  to  this  pit,  which 
evidently  seems  to  be  in  direct  opposition  to  what  can  be  rea- 
sonably expected  from  fit  lOn.  It  must  be  granted,  too,  at 
the  same  time,  that  there  is  something  of  incomprehensible 
about  it,  when  we  reflect  upon  what  reason  the  Priests  or  Su- 
perior of  the  convent  could  have  for  thus  leaving  the  pit  open. 
But  in  proportion  as  ouv  difficulty  increases  here,  the  credibili- 
iy  of  the  authoress  increases  with  it.  It  would  seem,  then, 
that  the  thing  was  so,  and  that  the  authoress  has  stated  the 
fact,  incredible  as  she  certainly  must  have  known  it  would  ap- 
pear, just  as  it  was,  rather  than  relate  a  mere  fiction  for  the 
sake  of  making  a  plausible  tale  founded  on  falsehood. 

We  have  now  one  more  obserr^ion  to  make,  and  that  is  in 
regard  to  the  challenge  made  by  the  authoress;  she  says, 
"Permit  me  to  go  through  the  Hotel  Dieu  Nunnery  at  Mon- 
treal," (the  place  where  the  horrors  she  describes  are  said  to 
have  taken  place,)  "  with  some  impartial  ladies  and  gentlemen, 
that  they  may  compare  my  account  with  the  interior  parts  of 
the  building,  into  which  no  persons  but  the  Roman  Bishops 
and  the  Priests  are  ever  admitted  ;  and  if  they  do  not  find  my 
description  true,  then  discard  me  as  an  impostor.  Bring  me 
before  a  court  of  justice — there  I  am  willing  to  meet  Latargtie, 
Dufresne,  Phelan,  Boniti,  and  Richards,  (the  Priests,)  and 
their  wicked  companions,  with  the  Superior,  and  any  of  the 
Nuns,  before  ten  thousand  men."  p.  15. 

This  challenge  being  made,  and  the  accusations  laid  against 
the  "Hotel  Dieu  Nunnery"  beinof  of  the  most  atrocious 
character,  the  Bishop  and  Clergy  of  Montreal  have  now  a  fair 
opportunity  of  vindicating  their  innocence,  and  proving  Maria 
Monk  to  be  an  impostor,  if  an  impostor  she  is. 


4 


DECISIVE    CONFIRMATION. 


11 


The  statements  made  in  these  "Disclosures"  are  creating 
universal  excitement  through  the  whole  United  States,  as  well 
as  in  Canada.  Many,  and  perhaps  the  generality,  believe  them 
to  be  true.  Under  such  circumstances,  the  Romish  Clergy  at 
Montreal  ought  to  accept  the  challenge.  It  is  notliing  more 
than  what  is  due  to  public  opinion.  It  is  a  duty,  moreover, 
which  they  owe  to  themselves. 

If  they  refuse  to  let  the  interior,  or  at  least,  p.  part  of  the 
interior  of  the  Convent,  be  examined,  the  pubhc,  then,  will  be 
confirmed  in  the  belief,  that  the  disclosures  made  by  MariaMonk 
are  true. 

Let  us  suppose,  for  instance,  that  such  horrible  disclosures 
had  been  made  respecting  some  religious  or  literary  institution 
ill  the  United  States.  Let  this  institution,  for  example,  be  Yale 
College,  at  ^e\v  Haven,  or  any  other  of  our  institutions,  would 
not  the  officers  of  that  iuotitution,  in  order  to  remove  the  least 
ground  of  suspicion,  open  their  doors,  and  invite  investigation? 
Most  certainly  they  would.  In  like  manner,  if  the  Romish 
Clergy  at  Montreal,  who  have  now  an  opportunity  of  viiidicat- 
ing  their  innocence,  do  not  avail  themselves  of  that  opportunity, 
what  can,  and  what  will  the  world  conclude,  but  that  they  are 
guilty } 

They  deny  that  Maria  Monk  was  a  Nun  in  the  Hotel  Dieu 
Nunnery  »t  Montreal.  They  have  now  an  opportunity  of 
provmg,  (if  it  is  true  that  she  was  not  a  Nun,)  that  Maria  Monk 
is  a  calumniator.  Deference  to  public  feeling,  and  duty  to 
themselves,  if  they. are  innocent,  loudly  demand  of  the  Bishop 
of  Montreal,  to  prove  that  the  Disclosures  of  Maria  Monk  are 
calumnies  and  falsehoods  ;  and  this  they  can  do,  provided  her 
statements  are  false,  by  merely  opening  a  (aw  doors  in  the  Con- 
vent, and  introducing  some  respectable  and  disinterested  persons 
into  the  interior  of  it. 

They  will  have  to  do  this,  we  repeat  n  again,  or  else  the 
world  must,  and  will  believe,  that  the  Disclosures,  awful  as 
they  are,  are  but  too  true. 

I  know  not  whether  the  Disclosures  are  all  true  or  not. 
Some,  and  I  can  say  many  of  her  statements,  I  know  to  be  true ; 
and  I  know  it,  from  my  own  personal  knowledge  relative  to 
Nunneries.  I  have  been  a  Popish  Priest,  have  had  the  super- 
intendence of  a  Nunnery  in  Kentucky,  and  consequently,  I 
must  know  something  about  what  Nuns  are,  and  what  Nun- 
neries are. 

I  am  now  preparing  for  the  Press  a  second  edition  of  the 
first  volume  of  the  "Downfall,"  to  be  printed  m  a  book-lbrm. 
In  this,  I  have  some  important  disclosures  to  make  relative  to 
Nunneries  in  the  United  States,  part  of  wbich  has  never  ap- 


■*»   •"'■ 


ip 


\2 


DECISIVE   CONFIRMATION. 


peared  before  tlie  public.  If  this  were  out,  the  public  mind 
would  be  well  prepared  for  the  "Awful  Disclosures"  of 
Maria  Monk;  or  for  any  other  disclosure  whatsoever ;  for  in 
my  humble  opinion,  and  I  speak  from  personal  knowledge  of 
the  subject,  there  is  nothing,  however-  shocking  it  may  be, 
which  is  not  perpetrated  in  the  secluded  haunts  of  Popish 
Nunneries. 

Truth  needs  not  the  aid  of  calumny  and  falsehood.  If  the 
statements  of  Maria  Monk  are  false,  I  would  be  among  the  first 
to  hold  her  up  to  public  scorn.  The  truth  or  falsity  of  her 
Disclosures  can  be  easily  attested  by  the  accepting  of  the  chal- 
lenge she  has  given.  If  it  be  not  accepted,  I,  for  one,  will  be- 
lieve her  statements  lo  be  true,  awful  as  they  are. 

Evasion  now  is  futile.  Jesuitism  is  brought  to  its  dernier 
ressort.  The  door  must  be  opened,  or  every  mouth  that  speaks 
will  cry  out,  guilty —guilty —guilty. 

The  annexed  plate  represents  a  fact  described  by  Rosamond, 
the  American  female,  who  was  held  captive  under  a  Popish 
Priest,  in  the  island  of  Cuba  during  five  years.  It  is  the  cut- 
ting up  of  young  negroes  and  making  them  into  sausages: 
"  Father  Francisco,  who  was  the  Confessor  of  Poncheetee,  was 
the  Priest  who  obtained  the  reprieve  of  some  of  the  robbers  who 
were  condemned  for  killing  black  people,  and  making  sausages 
of  them.  This  occurred  "just  before,  and  at  the  lime  of  my 
first  coming  to  Havanna,  about  eight  years  ago.  They  were 
Spaniards,  Frenchmen,  Italians,  and  Portuguese,  who  belonged 
to  the  gang.  They  had  their  trial  while  I  lived  on  the  island, 
and  were  condemned.  I  saw  twelve  of  them  hung.  There 
were  about  fifty  belonging  to  the  gang.  Some  were  sent  to 
the  Spanish  mines.  Of  "those  who  were  reprieved  was  the 
captain.  He  had  a  great  deal  of  money  ;  and  with  the  former 
governor,  and  the  Priests,  money  would  save  any  person's  life 
from  the  gallows.*  I  have  frequently  heard  people  say,  that 
they  carried  on  their  robberies  two  years  before  they  were  de- 
tected. They  lived  about  two  miles  out  of  the  city,  by  the 
Montserat  gate.  They  used  to  seek  out  the  young  and  fat  ne- 
groes, to  make  up  the  sausages.  Those  who  bought  and  eat 
them,  said  they  were  the  best  they  ever  eai.  They  called  them 
French  sausages  ;  and  people  far  and  near  would  buy  them. 
They  were  detected  by  two  young  negresses,  who  were  sent 
out  according  to  the  custom  of  the  city,  with  dry  goods,  and 
other  articles  for  sale,  in  the  streets,  as  is  customary.     One  of 

*  Captnin  J.  E.  Alexander,  in  his  tour  through  the^West  India  islands,  tells 
us  that,  "  11"  a  criminal  has  money,  he  may  put  oil  capital  punishment  for 
years,  even  after  sentence  is  passed  upon  him  ;  but  he  who  is  friendless  and 
penniless,  mourjts  the  scaffold  immediately  after  he  has  been  found  guilty  of  a 
capital  offence."    Alexander's  Transatlantic  Sketches,  Vol.  I.  o.  357.— Ed. 


DECISIVE    CONFIRMATION. 


13 


went  to  the  door,  to  ask  for  hpr        r  i??  ^''^"^  '  ^"^  *'^^» 

out  at  the  back  door  some  „;  dnce  Thi  t  '7  '^\^'  T^ 
they  had  robbed  her  of  some  S"  h^^^lds  1 1^™^.  ^'''  ^''' 
men  for  the  natives  to  rail  in  tl  iS  u  '  ^^  '^  '^  "^^  uncom- 
pilfer  theml  annhen  'he  noors'li^"'^""''  ^"'^^  ^^^'  ^«°^«'  ^« 
master  or  distress  inost^'c^u^U^^orZ^o^^^^^  '^^^^^-'^ 

consequence  of  their  puaishment    uSt       i"  -^^^^  ^^^  ^" 

they  come  by  their  deaih  '  '  "''^^'^  '°  ^"^^^^^^  ^^«^^ 

he^a^b^St^hfrToCll'Z^^^^^^  ^  '"'^^^?  -^^«^<^ 

ing  out  again  ;  and  she  took  tlfp^        '"''"'"'  ^"^  "«*  ^°'"- 

thl  soldiers,  who  tua?d  die  ri  t  ''''T''"^'''''  *"^"^'^^^  ^^*'h 

•     demand  her'  sla^e,  fvltf  IL^  ^'^'1^^  murtred^^^V 

girffth^^^^^^^^^^^  i^-t   Jtd^^T  V'^^  '?^"^  ^^^^ 

ber  of  other  dead  bodies  whlhtht  ^"'  °^'  '''''^  ^  """^- 

fortunate  in  getting  hold  rf  Sns  whn  L^  "'^^  'i'""'''" 

tioned  this  inslanci  of  his  beSdinJ^h.       TT'^'""'^  '"™- 
it."    •'  Rosamond,"  p  188    '"™'*"'S:  *e  cannibals  in  proof  of 

i^mm 

described.  executed  lor  the  atrocious  crime  above 

the  Ln's  bSHxecuted  fof  tlt'^T*'^  mentioned  the  fact  of 

befora  such  a  pers^  JTr  '         l^^u  ^^^n^'^n^  deed,  evtm 

known  in'hilC  "-  "^^'^"'^"^'  "^^^"^  ^^  Havanna  was 

■ '^  '  ^""  i^osamoaa,  the  authoress  of  the  Nar- 


# 


u 


DECISIVE    CONPlUMATlON. 


rative,  related  the  fact  to  her  friends  in  this  city,  previous  to  her 
acquaintance  with  Doctor  ^'7ard,  and  without  knowing  that 
any  one  had  been  informed  of  it.  . 

Nor  is  this  the  only  instance  of  such  a  horrid  crime.  Ihe 
same  deed  took  place  a  few  years  ago,  in  the  city  ot  Fans; 
and  the  miserable  criminals  were  publicly  broke  upon  the 
wheel  for  it.     The  facts  upon  record  are  as  follows : 

»  A  countryman  (of  the  richer  sort)  having  come  to  Paris  on 
business,  went  into  a  barber's  shop  to  get  shaved ;  (from  whence, 
in  the  sequel,  it  appears  he  never  came  out  again.)     He  was 
followed  by  his  little  dog,  who  attracted  the  notice  of  the  bar- 
ber's neicrhbours,  by  remaining  near  his  door,  day  and  night, 
howlin'r  and  moaning  without  intermission,  to  the  great  annoy- 
ance of  the  barber,  Who  tried  to  drive  him  away  or  destroy 
him  without  success.    In  the  interim  the  countryman  s  friends 
coming  to  ascertain  the  reason  why  he  did  not  returri,  heard 
of  the  dog's  singular  conduct,  and  knowing  their  friend  had  a 
little  dog  with  him,  these  persons  proceeding  to  the  barbers, 
knew  the  dog  to  belong  to  their  missing  friend ;  he  also  knew 
them,  and  his  rage  against  the  barber  became  furious.     1  he 
Police,  attracted  by  the  man's  friends  accusing  the  barber  ot 
murder,  ajid  the  unceasing  rage  of  the  dog,  commenced  search- 
incr  the  premises ;  and,  to  the  horror  of  all,  discovered  a  trap 
in^the  siiop  floor  to  let  any  unfortunate  being  whom  the  barber 
mio-ht  choose  to  destroy,  fall  headlong  to  the  cellar  beneath. 
Searching  further,  they  noticed  a  door  artfully  concealing  a 
passage   leading  under  ground,  to  a  celebrated  pie-makers 
kitchen  four  or  live  houses  oif.     Horrible  to  relate,  they  found 
the  master  pie-man,  and  another,  making  minced  meat  for  pies 
of  the  flesh  of  persons  whom  the  barber  had  entrapped  for 
that  purpose.     Shocking  as  this  seems,  it  is  nevertheless  a  real 
fact,  and  publicly  substantiated." 

There  is  another  fact  related  in  the  "Awful  Disclosures, 
which  appears,  it  seems  to  many,  to  be  wrapped  up  wholly  m 
incredibility  ;  and  this  is  the  account  given  by  Maria  Monk, 
of  the  Priests,  keeping  a  register  of  the  names  of  the  infants 
that  are  destroyed  in  the  Nunnery.  , 

We  would  ask,  in  the  first  place,  who  is  there  upon  earth  that 
can  account  for  all  the  oddities  and  irreconcilabilities  in  the 
conduct  of  the  Popish  Priesthood,  those  advocates  and  support- 
ers of  that  despotic  spiritual  power  which  in  Scripture  is  em- 
phaUcally  styled,  "Mystehy,  Babylon  the  Gi^^at  the 
Mother  OF  Harlots,  and  abominations  of  the  earth? 

^HavSgLeived  the  ''Mark  of  the  Beast'' in  my  right 

,       .      H    .- r„..-.  n-.4;,,^tinr«  and  ^<^"secration  to  the  ser- 

hano  ai  the  unie  ui  luy  r^iuiiiauvit  i»ij' >--  - 


DECISIVE  CONFIRMATION. 


15 


vice  of  the  ^' Beast»  I  will  endeavour,  since  I  have  heen  ini- 
tiated^mto  some  of  the  mysteries,  to  state  what  I  think  is  the 
probable  reason  for  keeping  a  register  of  the  names  of  those 
jjoor  unfortunate  children,  who,  Maria  Monk  declares,  are  first 
baptized,  then  murdered,  and  finally  thrown  into  the  pit.     I 
think  It  IS  very  probable  that  the  Nuns  do  not  generally  know 
that  the  children  are  allmurdered,  but,  that  they,  on  the  con- 
trary, are  made  to  believe  that  some  of  them,  at  least,  are  pre- 
servea  and  sent  to  the  Foundling  Hospital.    In  order,  therelbre, 
to  gratify  these  poor  deluded  women,  the  birth  of  the  children  is 
puf  upon  record,  that  they  may  afterwards  know  how  old  their 
children  are,  and,  fiom  time  to  time,  have  the  gratification  of 
seeing  and  conversing  with  them.     If  the  children  are  females, 
the  day  may  come  when  they,  too,  will  be  introduced  as  novices 
and  ultimately  take  the  veil  themselves.    In  Popery  every  child 
that  is  christened  has  its  name  registered,  and  if  this  ceremony 
were  omitted,  the  Nuns  would  consider  themselves  too  much 
slighted  to  submit  to  it.   Therefore,  as  it  is  the  policy  of  Popery 
to  be  all  things  unto  all  men,  this  punctilio  must  be  complied 
with.   Be  the  reason  what  it  may,  we  have  no  reason  for  dis- 
believing the  fact  as  it  is  slated. 

Vr\t?^^^%  ^^^*  *^^  P"^^\°  "^^y  '^^  ^^^  completely  the  Romish 
Priesthood  can  screen  themselves  from  detection  in  any  un- 
lawful mtercourse  they  may  have  with  females,  we  will  lay  be- 
fore the  world  the  doctnne  of  the  Romish  church  on  the  sub- 
ject of  those  who  are  possessed  with  the  devil.     Let  any  one 

•In  ^nf  ^A      ^?^^  T""  •  ^^^  '*^^'^"  ^^hy  s"^'i  ^  doctrine  was 
invented.      Their  doctrine   upon   this  subject   is,  th^t,   The 
devil  has  the  power,  and  actually  exercises  the  power,  of  assum- 
mg  a  human  shape,  and,  under  the  appearance  of  a  man,  of 
seducing  females.     But,  strange  to  tell  !  in  this  case,  the  off- 
spring of  such  connexion,  is  said  to  belong  not  to  the  devil 
neither  to  the  woman  but  "  sed  illius  cujus  est  semen.-     Ligor.' 
rheol.  Prax.  Conf  C.  vii.  N.  111.     f  his  is  the  most  cSm^ 
modious  doctnne  that  Popery,  or  rather  the  devil,  [for  none 
but  a  demon  could  have  devised  it,]  could  have  framed,  in  or 
der  that  the  Priests  might  indulge  with  impunity  their  lustful 
appe  ites.      Under  the  cover  of  this  "  doctrhJof  devilsrs 
licentious  Priest,  in  order  to  exculpate  himself  from  the  con 
demnation  of  il hcit  connexion,  has  nothing  more  to  do  than 
to  lay  It  to  the  charge  of  the  devil.     It  would  be  in  vain  fo  th 
woman  to  pretend  to  identify  the  Priest's  person.      He  won W 
tell  her  ,t  was  the  devil,  who  assumed  his  shape,  and  imita  ed 
his  voice;   and  he  being  a  Holy  Confessor    she  wo^d  be 
obliged  to  believe  him.     Nor  does  the  abomination  end  here 
for  the  doctrine  is  so  well  adapted  to  accommod.tP  ^Zr^H^t 


16 


DECISIVE   CONFIRMATION. 


ness,  that  oven  if  it  is  certain  that  the  Priest  himself  is  the  oM 
who  is  cfuilty  of  the  action,  still  the  blame  may  be  laid  wholly 
on  the  devil,  and  the  Priest  be  excused  from  the  guilt  of  sin  in 
what  he  does.  The  following  is  what  is  said  by  the  Saint  on 
the  subject ;  and  is  confirmed,  as  he  says,  by  «  Cardinal  Pe- 
trucci,  and  St.  Thomas  Aquin."  "  It  is  known  that  the  devil 
can  take  possession  of  any  part  of  a  man  ;  for  instance,  his 
eyes,  his  tongue,  or  even  verenda.  Hence  it  happens  that  the 
man  utters  words  the  most  obscene,  although  his  mind  may 
be  far  from  thinking  about  what  he  says.  Hence  it  sometimes 
happens,  also,  that  the  impulse  is  so  strong,  that  he  is  ^en 
urged  on  to  strip  himself  naked  ;  and  to  do  other  filthy  things, 
which  1  am  ashamed  to  write  about."  [! ! !]  «  When  the  devil 
has  thus  suspended  the  use  of  reason,  there  is  no  more  sin  in 
what  the  man  does,  than  there  would  be  if  it  was  done  by  a 
beast."  [! ! !]  Ligor.  Prax.  Cont.  vii.  N.  111. 

This  authority  of  Ligori  no  Papist  dare  deny,  since  his 
doctrine  is  declared  by  the  church  of  Rome  to  be  "  sound,  and 
according  to  God,  sana  ac  secundum  Deum."  Ligor.  Theol. 
Praef  And  the  man  himself  has  lately  been  Canonized  and  en- 
rolled among  the  Saints.* 

We  believe  the  "  Awful  Disclosures"  of  Maria  Monk  to 
he  substantially  true. 

*  For  a  full  development  of  this  doctrine  of  the  Romish  church  in  regard 
to  persons  possessed  with  the  devil,  see  "  Downfall  op  Babylon,"  a  semi- 
monthly Paper,  published  at  No.  131  Nassau  street. 


s* 


^ 


